Make it possible to put HPyType_Spec in HPyModuleDef.defines about hpy HOT 4 CLOSED

I'm closing this and merging #180 which adds HPyHelpers_AddType as the eventual solution.

from hpy.

I like this idea & I suggested something similar myself in IRC.

The upsides: removes the only non-declarative part of defining types in modules; provides one obvious way to set up a type; helps people avoid accidentally doing slightly odd things during type setup.

Downsides: adds a layer of abstraction; makes it a bit harder to customize type setup; I'm not sure how many types will need to doing something different during type setup.

from hpy.

I like this idea & I suggested something similar myself in IRC.

uh, maybe I read it on IRC and that's why it came to my mind: sorry for the missing attribution 😅.
OTOH, no cookie for you because you didn't open an issue first 😛

The upsides: removes the only non-declarative part of defining types in modules; provides one obvious way to set up a type; helps people avoid accidentally doing slightly odd things during type setup.

Downsides: adds a layer of abstraction; makes it a bit harder to customize type setup; I'm not sure how many types will need to doing something different during type setup.

To be clear, I am not proposing to kill HPyType_FromSpec: it will still be possible to call it manually, if you want.

Also, note that maybe HPyDef_TYPE is not needed. We could write directly this:

HPyDef PointTypeDef = {
    .kind = HPyDef_Kind_TypeSpec,
    .typespec = {
        .name = "foo",
        .defines = ...
    }
};

from hpy.

I started implementing this in #173, but passing a base type or metaclass requires access to the handle for that type, which won't be available statically. This made me wonder whether implementing this is a good idea? Perhaps there is something we can do instead?

from hpy.